TTAG reader DH writes:
Depending on my mood in the mornings, I’ll either listen to XM radio for morning show idiot-free music or NPR. Yeah, I know. Anyway, as luck would have it this morning was a NPR day. They have a long-running a series called StoryCorps. It’s a collection of short three- to five-minute personal stories as filler between the local and national news. I was getting ready to hop out of the truck when the story titled “The Day One Man Decided To Give Up His Gun” came on. I was compelled to stop and listen. . .
Click here to listen to the piece. The gist: Mr. Ned lived with his wife and dog in a bad neighborhood in New Orleans. For protection, he had a gun. One day he had an altercation with his neighbor who managed the apartment complex, Mr. Ned was threatened with eviction. And so…
“He walked downstairs, I closed my door and I went to my bedroom and I got my gun,” he said. “What a gun does, it talks to you. Things that you’d normally say I’m not going to do or I’ll just let it pass, gun talks to you and says, ‘You don’t have to take that.'”
Seeing the rage building, his wife locked the door and kept him from leaving the apartment. She talked him down. He contacted the owner of the complex and shortly afterwards, the manager was fired and evicted. And then things took a turn for the worse.
Mr. Ned’s dog was poisoned, and there was little doubt in his mind who did it. Later he sees someone who he thinks is the guy that killed his dog, chases him down with intent to harm, but realizes it is the wrong man, and makes amends. As luck would have it, he was not carrying at the time.
“And I know that if I would’ve had the gun, I’d have shot that man. At that point, I knew that my anger was so bad, if I don’t control this thing, I’m going to hurt somebody or somebody’s going to hurt me,”
“So I said, ‘I’m done. I can’t pack no gun no more.’ And it took that kind of thing to get me right.”
The antis will say this is exactly the reason why guns must be controlled: guns turn an altercation into a gun fight. Blood will flow in the streets. Well, as it turns out, maybe not so much.
I drive on IH35 daily. That alone is cause for daily road rage, or at least a prescription for a low-dosage aspirin regime. Yet not one of my firearms has ever spoken to me in the way Mr. Ned’s did. (I think the only gun that has ever spoken to me was a Beretta M9. Unfortunately, I don’t speak Italian. Maybe if I did I wouldn’t have lost a little moon-shaped piece of skin between my index finger and thumb.) Since getting my CHL, I’ve actually found myself more tolerant of others.
The data on concealed carry permit holders and criminality proves that responsible, law-abiding gun owners show a remarkable degree of restraint. An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Carry Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population (William E. Sturdevant, PE, September 11, 1999) shows that people with concealed carry permits are:
5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public
13.5 times less likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than the general public
I would even go so far as to say that having the capability to exercise deadly force makes gun owners more likely to avoid confrontation. Thoughts?
I tell my friends that if you want to really practice Christianity carry a gun. Because when you a carry a gun you have to take abuse and insult with a smile.
I am flying the BS flag on this one. Sorry but it’s on NPR or Nation Propaganda radio and it says just what they WANT to hear. I have NEVER met a short fused CCW guy in 58 years. If anything EVERY serious defense instructor teaches you to avoid a likely confrontational situation and defuse. To paraphrase Mr. Myagi: “Best way to survive gun not to be in one.”
Ray
Maybe, maybe not. But the story does not say what NPR thinks it says. It actually says that gun owners are by and large responsible citizens. When he discovered that he didn’t have the temperament to own a gun he did the right thing.
Sounds like liberal agitprop to me too. It’s worth remembering that Penthouse magazine used to pay authors to write racy “letters to the editor” pieces which the magazine hoped it’s readers would think were from “real” people and not small pieces of fiction. This worked for a long time until people started catching on. NPR’s programming, like most broadcast media today, is the work of 20-something producers who have absolutely no problem helping “talent” shape their stories to fit a preconceived idea of what needs to be presented in a particular way at a particular time. After all StoryCorps, like All Thinngs Considered and other NPR programs, is a show—well ordered, usually scripted, carefully shaped to attract a desired demographic . . . and about as “candid” as the previous descriptors imply.
That, Garrison, was right on the money. In the evenings when I’m out getting some exercise, I like to switch back and forth between Mark Levin and NPR during the commercials. I like to hear both sides but there’s a reason they call in the Nightly Propaganda Report.
Another guy that switches between NPR and Mark Levin? I thought I was the only one….
I grew up a default California costal liberal, it’s not a political judgement, it’s just in the air. When I got older, served my country, starting working and became a man I became a conservative. I put away childish things like men are supposed to do.
But not NPR. It’s a bad habit, like smoking. My permit(s) are important to me. To important to throw away. It makes you very aware of where the lines are drawn. I don’t have the luxury of being a reckless jerk.
+1 BS. Nice little fiction to support their “conclusions”. Not that I’m ever really confrontational but I’m less confrontational when carrying which is almost whenever I have pants on away from the home. Now that I think about it, I’m super friendly without pants on so look out.
Amen. I am so mellow now, even when I don’t have my gun on me. Not gonna lose my permit over road rage or pettiness. I am so calm, even in rush hour, letting people merge! Etc
“Not gonna lose my permit over road rage or pettiness.”
Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding … we have a winner!!!!!
People who don’t carry a firearm literally have absolutely nothing to lose if they decide to get into a fight with someone. Well, they might lose a little money and spend a night in jail but to them it is well worth it to finally set someone straight.
On the other hand people who carry firearms don’t want to go to jail for even one night and they certainly don’t want to lose their firearms over an annoying person.
I’m more mellow now than I’ve ever been, but I’ve got a ways to go.
However, I work as a police officer and as church security, so I don’t always have the option to be non-confrontational. I just escorted a homeless 5150 off of out church property after searching his stuff. He was also ID’d and photographed.
But I wasn’t a jerk about it, had witnesses to the inappropriate behavior, and was able to remove the person from our property without any use of force. He was looking to steal property (my speculation) and asking married women for their phone numbers. He also said his father was the police chief and that he had $90 billion in savings. His elevator wasn’t going to the top floor.
I definitely wanted to avoid a fight, and was able to succeed. This time, anyways.
Sometimes when you ask a married woman for her phone number you get a smile and the number.
And sometimes you might get shot. 🙂
It’s that risk-rewards thing…
It sounds you handled the whacko the right way. I’m a lot mellower than I used to be, but like you, have a ways to go.
Back before the boating accident, when I had a pistol, the situational awareness concern about what “could” happen did let me avoid several potential issues.
It surely does.
Concealed carry definately makes me less confrontational. I use to own only long guns, and did not ccw. That made no difference for me. It is the “carry” not the “ownership” that changed me. That said, I’ve always been a peaceful and gentle person.
Before I carried, a punch or smack from me to an opponent was a given…..turn the other cheek…..no EFFIN way. I have conceal carried for about fifteen years, four and a half professionally. I have learned to check my aggression in ways I could not before I carried.
I never talk to my gun and my gun never talks to me — it is a tool and it does not talk any more than my hammer, drill or screw driver does. This guy needs help.
If the story is true ( I tend to believe that many of those stories are made for effect) then that man is going to be in a fight with or without a gun. if your first instinct in any confrontation is to go for your gun, then you have a problem.
I work with a lot of people who are politically left leaning who say things that defy logic or common sense on a daily basis. If I was quick to anger I would have been fired or in jail a long time ago. Many of my co-workers seem to be a hair trigger from being locked up however.
An armed society is a polite society, amirite?
CC’d for decades here in New England and have managed to not have to shoot anybody yet. I’d say it has a calming effect, as in ‘why sweat the small stuff?’ If on the other hand someone comes at me with a bat, knife, another gun or whatever, I’m good to go.
+1
+2
Well. It’s not like I’ve had many confrontations in my life that have degenerated into fisticuffs. The fact is, beyond one fight in Junior High, the only fight I’ve had was when a human predator tried to mug me, which is when I started carrying a gun. This is also after many years of martial arts; Aikido, Tae-Kwon Do and MMA.
Since then? Over 17 years of carrying a weapon? I do even more to avoid walking into an obvious cluster; see a pack of gang banger wanna be’s with more attitude hanging off them shinier than any bling hanging out on a street corner and I’ll go down another street, if possible. So I haven’t actually had to draw a weapon with the intent to use it, except when four Pit Bulls attacked my dog, in that time.
Both the family I have and the gun give me a moment to pause. It also reminds me that the jerk who cut me off could be in my situation; its a better survival plan to live and let live.
So Robert, you say there’s a bunch of bu!!sh!t on NPR?
This is my shocked face.
This post was written by DH. But yes, I do listen to NPR. I also listen to MSNBC. And Progressive on XM. It’s absolutely true that I want to know what the enemies of freedom are thinking and saying.
“what the enemies of freedom are feeling and saying.”
fixed that there, I am pretty sure their leaders do not encourage them to think and they seem content to abide by that.
nailed it!
You listen to NPR? Shudder. Well, it’s good to know how the enemies of freedom think. But this is why you make the big bucks. Better you than me.
I realize this goes against our common experience with firearms and carry ,but we shouldn’t ignore the sad fact that many folks don’t have the temperament for gun ownership.
We may not have the wish to employ a gun as a tool of vengeance ,but lotsa folks out there do. Gun control isn’t the answer-because frankly if this guy wanted the landlord dead bad enough he’d talk to some street pals and get a ‘gat -but this goes to show why one should always carry.
People will kill over the slightest thing….
I don’t know who said it, but it goes something like this “If you think you shouldn’t own a gun, you are correct.”
Yeah, try not to listen to NPR. I don’t say this as a criticism, but as a concern about your blood pressure. It’s not healthy man.
I don’t talk or listen to inanimate objects. My guns are tools, investments, conversion pieces and symbols of my freedom and citizenship. The last thing I want to do is hurt another human being.
THIS^100000
Agreed.
Yes, absolutely. My habit of dodging trouble turned into taking active steps to avoid it. I can’t carry because NJ, but ownership was all it took. Last year I had a drunk college kid of at least twice my musculature pick a fight with me at a bar. He clearly had me mistaken for someone who had insulted him, so I took a step back, smiled, didn’t get confrontational, and spoke calmly. The tension was completely dissolved in a few seconds. The drunk smiled, apologized with slurred speech, and staggered away. I got outta there fast. I also learned that while there are no guarantees, the vibe you give off to a potential aggressor can stop trouble before it even begins.
I was once listening to NPR and my Ruger said to me, “Shoot the radio!”
Actually, there’s a lot of good stuff on NPR. The problem is it’s like the little girl in the old nursery rhyme: when it’s good, it’s very, very good, but when it’s bad, it’s horrid.
I actively avoid trouble when carrying. With a fanatical level of avoidance if trouble finds me it’s probably trouble worth having a firearm with me for.
An armed society is a polite society.
It did for me. I think it’s because having the means to use lethal force in self-defense forced me to think about the outcomes of possible confrontations, all the way to the end. If I yell at some guy because he does something to annoy me, I don’t necessarily know how far it’ll go. It could be a quick back and forth, or it could escalate, maybe all the way into something life-threatening. Better to avoid that kind of thing altogether.
My gun and I engage in debate, like “do you think Shannon would like your cigar smoking?” or “wonder if Shannon has that wrinkled nose look on her face in the morning?” My gun just says “screw her”
Yo Dirk…….
When your gun says
“screw her ”
What is your reply?
” My gun just says “screw her””
Dirk, with your (PRO-ACTIVELY CENSORED) or your gun’s (PRO-ACTIVELY CENSORED)?
🙂
In my case it not only makes me less confrontational but also much more aware of my surroundings. I’ve not had to use my gun, but I’ve been in use of force situations in the past so I know what I’m capable of doing. If I ever have to use my gin, it’s going to be because it was necessary not because I wanted to.
I do believe the guy was telling the truth in his story as I’ve met such people in the past. In that context, I think he made the right choice and respect him for that.
It’s a shame, though, that NPR would never air the other side that so many here have told.
I agree, nothing brings the reality closer to the front than the realization that your poor decisions can cost somebody their life. I noticed a similar trend in my other former service buddies. The closer we were to the pointy end of the stick, the less likely we were to lose our tempers. People who claim that having a gun makes you more likely to be violent are delusional. They are projecting their insecurities and violent tendencies on to others.
I’m an interesting case study. In school, I had a hell of a temper and didn’t give a damn about the consequences of my actions. I got into fights, had numerous disciplinary problems in school. Hell, I was one of those idiots who thought that violence solved problems without consequence to those who wield it. One enlistment later… Not so much. I would hardly call myself a pacifist. However, a decade later, I live by a simple concept. “Never start a fight. Avoid it at all costs. But if someone else does… Finish it.” I have the power to do so, and with that power comes the responsibility to use it wisely, or if possible, not at all.
That’s what the antis will never understand. They can never understand that the greatest responsibility a human can have is staying their hand. They will never understand standing on the precipice and saying NO. They are children in adult bodies… and because of that, they will never know the cost that we are prepared to pay to protect our families. Hopefully, they never will. It is a cost that is not paid in time or money, but an eternal stain upon your soul. The hours spent alone, in the dark, wondering what else you could have done… The pain of knowing that despite the horror of your decision, the alternative was worse.
” I would hardly call myself a pacifist. However, a decade later, I live by a simple concept. “Never start a fight. Avoid it at all costs. But if someone else does… Finish it.”
Just had that exact thing almost happen about a half-hour ago. I was in a bookstore parking lot when I saw a guy, mid-20’s, walking across an almost deserted parking lot and angling directly toward my car. This was definitely one of “those” moments. As soon as he saw that I was watching him, he changed direction and walked off. It was in those moments when the guy was headed directly for me that I was wondering ” am I going to have to fight this guy, or what” ? This guy was black, but if he’d been Hispanic or white, and was headed purposefully for my car I think my response would have been the same. It was a very unsettling few moments. which thankfully came to nothing. There was a time when I wouldn’t have noticed until it was too late.
I got my gun,” he said. “What a gun does, it talks to you.
I have deep and meaningful discussions and relationships with my guns, kitchen appliances, household appliances, vehicles, and the walls all the time. I get deep vibrations from all of them all the time. I have deep discussions with God and Satan when they talk through the dogs barking as well.
I mean doesn’t every one?
Personally, I’m glad Ned got rid of his guns. He recognized he has anger issues, that he was not able at that time to be a responsible gun owner, so he got rid of them. What Ned fails to do is to fully accept personal responsibility for his issues – he puts them at least partly on the weapon. I’ve owned guns my entire life and the only thing any one of them ever said to me was a plaintive whine because I’d not cleaned one sufficiently after a range day.
The truth about guns also includes that there are some – otherwise law-abiding people – who simply shouldn’t own guns. People who know they will not be responsible with a firearm, or who have anger or impulse-control issues. Interestingly enough, this would include most progressive activists. Go figure.
That said, I FULLY SUPPORT their right to own firearms, even if doing so is potentially dangerous. Such is the cost of freedom and the price is personal responsibility. Screw up with a gun, go down for it. But do NOT infringe on the right in advance. Freedom involves lots of choices; at least Ned made his based upon his own recognition of his personal weakness.
If guns don’t make people killers, they also don’t make people polite. It’s just a hunk of metal, plastic, wood, etc. What makes CCWers more polite is their individual, personal recognition of potential outcomes. We all swallow our pride and in doing so become what are probably model citizens. it is our empathy that makes us this way, not the gat on our belt. A polite society is one where good citizens are armed, not just anyone. But then again, better to err on the side of freedom and personal responsibility than to abridge a right in advance, so sometimes things get very ugly. Said ugliness potentially mitigated by the good citizenship of a conveniently located CCWer.
Carrying absolutely makes me less confrontational personally. The amount of responsibility on my hip is something I don’t take lightly. Knowing this makes me brush off foolish encounters because I know how it could possibly end if I let it get out of control. Anyone who carries should feel the weight of their decision to do so.
The statistics seem to verify that by a ratio of about 6 to 1.
That just has to blow the anti’s minds.
Those people that loudly proclaim that they shouldn’t have access to a gun, I fully support them not having access to guns.
If they later grow up and mature, they can re-asses their decision.
I’m not a physically aggressive person, by nature. But I’ve never had qualms about verbal altercations. Until I started carrying. What started as a realization that I never wanted to bear any liability for instigating or escalating a situation has turned into Hakuna Matata as a habit. It is most noticeable while driving.
Owning and carrying a firearm doesn’t make me want to use it; it makes me want to *avoid* using it, whenever possible.
Chip – Agree and same here. I use to think the polite society thing was because guns would scare others into politeness. But since carrying (2 years now) I realize it’s the other way around. The finality of the power hanging on your hip, makes one take pause and think. I don’t even get upset at the idiot drivers anymore. It simply isn’t worth it. It truly is a shame that the anti’s can’t see this and understand the reality of things.
Anyone who thinks their gun talks to them has mental health issues and needs to stay away from ALL weapons and probably people as well. That said this is from NPR and could all be propaganda.
NPR listeners are aging lefty-boomers who want to believe they are smarter than the little people, and feel better because the hosts have fakey british accents. kulture!
I agree. I was telling my wife that since I started carrying everyday 2 months ago my thinking was changed. People I have not liked have told me how nice I am. I do try to avoid confrontation.
I practice dry fire draw with snap caps at least once a week. And live fire at the range at least once month. I really feel at peace.
NpR will paint a worst case scenario every time. Unless it the police. It’s OK for the “government ” to have guns. “Nothing can go wrong” (See the movie West World).
Tried riding that Beretta slide forward with the safety engaged, huh?
Could you expand on that, please? Do you get an inadvertent discharge on a beretta ‘riding the slide with the safety on’?
No not a discharge threat at all since the safety drum rotates the firing pin completely out of line with the hammer.
What happens is the decockee plunger engages the seat slowly as the slide is ridden forward, sometimes with too little force to cause the hammer to drop, and sometimes prevening the slide going into full battery while it’s engaged. The slide looks pretty normal in this condition but it’s actually back a couple kilometers, if you bump the slide or some other force is applied to overcome the spring tension of the seat against the decockee, suddenly the slide will go forward those last millimeters and the hammer will fall, all to the surprise of the handler. If there is any flesh between the hammer and the rear part of the slide when that occurs it often results in a little love nibble from the hammer.
I don’t carry a gun to be less confrontational. I carry a gun so that the “other guy” will be less confrontational.
Ralph – My suggestion – Lock you guns up and leave them home.
Huh the only inanimate thing that talks to me is money, and all it usually says it “see ya”
+1
And how!
I didn’t see where he had a concealed carry permit or even if he was eligible to own a gun. I an suspect of the entire story since it was NPR propaganda.
If that guy had that much anger management issues, he probably shouldn’t be given anything more dangerous than about 4″ of string, and even that with a permit.
No, carrying does not make me less confrontational, because I had already avoided confrontation to begin with. I stopped fighting because I graduated elementary school and grew up. I’ve gotten to the point where I literally see red, but I just walk away.
My politics are pretty far to the right. I’m hispanic having grown up and reside now in the Southwest, near the border with Mexico.
For a conservative, hispanic that is very pro 2A, and i carry concealed. I gotta say I find Story Corps entertaining, and moving at times. But I never let it influence my ethics or beliefs.
One story I heard years ago on NPR was regarding suicides by handguns, or guns. NPR really knows how to twist a story or skew a view. First thing I thought was “how does taking away a suicidal persons guns make them less suicidal?” Without outright saying it NPR was trying to allude that somehow taking away their right they would suddenly cure their “mental illness.”
I found that me myself have had the complete opposite affect when I have a gun on my or in my vehicle. I’m more likely to let a “road rager” just pass me by than do anything more to agitate the situation. It certainly has made me quite a bit more patient with other people, as well as agitated people.
Carrying my G26 has made me more self-assured when a potential situation is building. I have taken the role of an observer, not one to get involved. That is only because I know I can get involved and stop almost anything before things get ugly. Without a superior means to defend yourself or other innocents, your mentality will switch to fight-or-flight when maybe circumstances don’t call for it.
You bet your sweet bippy it makes me less confrontational.
1. If I fire my weapon for ANY reason, at the very least I’m going to have to explain myself to a bunch of heavily armed and somewhat nervous law enforcement officers. I REALLY don’t want to go there.
2. If I somehow am not arrested and jailed on the spot, I’m going to have to explain myself to some highly skeptical police detectives who would like nothing better than to throw my butt in jail. Shooting people is a police perogative and they are jealous of it.
3. If, through some divine intervention, I don’t have to raise bail money to get out of jail, I can expect the person or persons I shot, or their survivors, to haul my @ss into civil court where they will try to take everything I have, everything I might ever have, and all my hopes and dreams as well.
At this point you may ask why I carry at all.
“Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.”
lol @ reason # 2
Basically the police want to “get some” and you’re constitution loving ass is taking it away.
I’m not disagreeing
Eh, perhaps I was too harsh on the boys in blue.
But, remember this, they are NOT your friends.
Ask George Zimmerman if the cops wanted to throw his ass in jail. They all said good shoot until Rev Al got involved. At the trial they still said good shoot.
I’m with Ken. Even if this is “true” this guy is clearly crazy. Having a gun makes NO difference in my demeanor. Good for you RF taking one for the team. I can’t handle more than a few seconds of NPR drivel(or listening to why Bruce Jenner wants to chop his organ off for that matter).
They don’t (usually) chop nowadays.
They invert it and make an “outie” into an “innie”
The wonders of listening to NPR…
Maybe his gun should have told him that paranoid schizophrenics off their meds and hearing voices probably shouldn’t own guns. Oh wait, maybe his lamp told him that…
I call it the “Ring of Sauron” theory of violent crime – namely that violent crime is something that happens because ordinary people have access to weapons, because weapons have a will of their own and can influence the mind of anybody nearby.
Needless to say, it flies in the face of over 100 years of criminology. That’s why they rely on quasi-religious testimonies like this, rather than statistics.
Yeah, Ring of Sauron, I guess, since Ned is black he can’t be Elric of Melniboné.
This guy listened to his gun. Son of Sam listened to the neighbers dog. I’m seeing a connection here. Oh yeah, bat shite crazy.
I have run or driven away from an altercation on more than one occasion when tempted to do otherwise, just because I have a gun with me, and desperately want to avoid any temptation whatsoever to use it when not forced to. The only thing the gun “says” to me is, “You have chosen to defend yourself with deadly force. You must be a mature adult. You must avoid all but the absolutely unavoidable violent conflict. You must be incredibly responsible. You must show restraint, even if the other guy is challenging you, calling you a coward, and dog cussing you.”
That said, I would have to know for SURE who did it, but if someone murdered my dog, whose life I prize above most people, well, God help them. Killing a man’s best friend over a spat, and even over getting fired, is lowest of the low.
You have a really good head atop your shoulders. I agree with everything you said.
I do my best to avoid and de-escalate conflict if I have my gun with me. Knowing how a conflict could end if I am forced to use my gun, makes me very reluctant to get in any sort of confrontation with anyone.
WHY are there times you aren’t armed?
You need to bear in mind that different people have different circumstances. For example, I live 2 miles from the NJ line. I’m loath to have a traffic stop in NJ while carrying; so, I have to disarm when my agenda requires that I cross the NJ line.
Sometimes I have to go to the Post Office. I’d rather not leave my gun locked in the car.
For such reasons, I think it’s important to advance the RKBA to achieve National Reciprocity and ware-down the resistance to reducing gun-free zones.
The last 10 high-population Won’t-Issue jurisdictions are a long-run threat to building the support for the RKBA from a modest majority to a 3’rd-rail in American politics.
Gun-free zones are a means by which the Antis will harass law-abiding gun owners and discourage people from carrying. Consider the following illustrative scenario. We’ve interested Mrs. Smith in taking individual responsibility for defense of self and her dependents. She’s taken a couple of courses, got a permit and has a handgun. She finds that she can’t carry when she drops/picks-up her kids at school. Nor can she carry in the Post Office or her favorite grocery store. Her gun remains on her nightstand (or in her bedside safe). She is no longer invested in the RkBA.
The Antis have neutralized our Mrs. Smith just as they have neutralized Mr. Fudd. Guns are confined to the master bedroom, field and forrest. They are not operational in the public square; i.e., they are not PC in polite company.
There are reasons to not carry a firearm at times.
I work at a university. Carrying a firearm is illegal there. That may change if the Texas Campus Carry bill goes through.
However, I am NEVER unarmed. I always have my hands and feet with me. I’m not Bruce Lee or some kind of Karate master, but I AM the weapon.
A gun is just a tool. A damned fine tool but in the end just a tool
YOU are the weapon. Never forget this.
Somewhere around number 23 in those apocryphal “rules of a gunfight” is
Your number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.
It should be number 1!
His gun should have been telling him to go back and visit the nice fellows with the padded room since his meds clearly need to be adjusted. I wonder what other inanimate objects tell him? Does the cross walk sign whisper to him about dancing in the street at rush hour? Does the parking meter complain about people twisting its dial too hard? I certainly don’t want to know what the fire hydrant has to say about the neighbors boxer!
Typical Leftist hyperbole to anthropomorphise a demonic personality an inanimate object.
Before getting my CHL (Texas) I used to stop at a self-serve car wash on my way home from work in a not-so-great part of town. After starting carrying I no longer stopped at that car wash, I dove out of my way a few miles to go to one in a decent part of town.
I had no idea I would do this until after I carried the gun. I just don’t want to have to shoot anyone or even brandish it. It’s a profound difference to actually physically take responsibility for my own safety than just imagining doing it.
The religion referred to in the story is “totemism”, the belief that inanimate objects have sentient spirits inside them. This has been one of the fantasies of many anti-gunners, including Ann Landers, for one. Perhaps the armed intelligentsia could get up the funds to hire planes to fly over all the gun making plants all sprinkle them with ground up bat wings, monkeys’ blood and eye of newt.
That should make all those talking guns stop.
I just don’t encounter stupid: people/places/games/times. So, I have little cause to become confrontational. I do drive; so there is the occasional close-call. My reaction is always relief when it’s over. Then, there are the wife and kids; but apart from these, my life is pretty pacific. On no occasion have I been conscious of having my gun on such an occasion. I’m only conscious of the gun not being there when I’m in NJ.
A plural of anecdote is not data, as the gun-grabbers are wont to say.
Ironically, the gun-grabbers use anecdote as data.
In the end, it all comes down to the particular person. Generally speaking, however, those who choose to carry are very well aware — and certainly more so than most — the immediate consequences of their actions when in confrontation.
That being said, NPR just so happened to find a rare exception, and not one that disproves the rule, either.
I know it’s already been said here, but NPR, Narional Propaganda radio, or just blatant propaganda with an accent, is a joke. Zero credibility on this one.
In a fit of road rage I was seeing the red mist, I had my left hand on my door latch and was looking in my mirror at the cause of that rage. I saw two guys in the truck and thought “if this escalates to a fight, I’ll have to pull my gun”. So I put my hand back on the wheel and drove away.
Thanks RF, good article and a set of cites I hadn’t seen before.
Funny that those numbers dont get trotted out at all.
I’m still reading references on the left to the mythical*
“90% of Americans are for banning guns.”
*(tiny 2011 Quinnipiac poll of 1100 citizens in a democratic n.e. state, during 2012 presidential campaign)
B.S. meter tripped so bad had to Reset, lots of things wrong with this scenario, Having seen the after math of said confrontations, a normal person tends to be cautious with pulling their piece! as the results are pretty conclusive, pain for someone physical or Emotional! you do get aberrations in all things! it is what it is, Anti gun John Q public having an orgasm writing and reiterating this story!
“Maybe if I did I wouldn’t have lost a little moon-shaped piece of skin between my index finger and thumb.”
Heh. Glad I’m not the only one who got that particular “bite” from an M9. Still love that gun anyway.
This just seems too perfect. It falls right in line with the anti gun thoughts. My guns have never talked to me and I never think that my gun is the first way to solve my problems.
I’m willing to believe Mr. Ned’s story as far as it goes. What he doesn’t explain is whether, in the absence of a gun, he would have used a hammer from his workshop to split the guy’s skull, a knife from his kitchen to cut his throat, or, since his photo suggests to me that he is a large man, simply beat him to a pulp. His wife was wise not to let him out of the house while in a rage regardless of what weapons were available to him.
So they chronicle his tendency to initiate confrontations both before and after he owns a gun, right? I man that’s how you determine that the trait starts with gun ownership and show a potential causal relationship. Am I missing something?
My observations on the human psyche is that if a person cannot be trusted with a firearm, they cannot be trusted with any other potential weapon whether that is a kitchen knife, baseball bat, or a hammer.
Bob108 says:
April 27, 2015 at 07:40
“My observations on the human psyche is that if a person cannot be trusted with a firearm, they cannot be trusted with any other potential weapon whether that is a kitchen knife, baseball bat, or a hammer.”
Excellent point, but let’s take that one step further and parse it down to the least common denominator. If a person can’t be trusted with a firearm, they cannot be trusted. Period. So what does that say about the Shannon’s of the world. Do they really believe NOBODY is trustworthy? Is everyone in this country unworthy of being trusted? What a truly sad outlook on life. How sad their lives must be thinking everyone around them can’t be trusted. Because, if we turn it all around, if you CAN be trusted, If you are trustworthy, then shouldn’t you be trusted with a firearm?
Gman; excellent line of reasoning. And, it can be carried to its logical conclusion by tracing the argument backwards.
Where do our LEOs come from? Canada? United Kingdom? No; obviously, they come from among ourselves. If all civilians are presumed to be untrustworthy to carry a gun then from what ranks does society recruit its LEOs with the presumption that they will all be armed?
Obviously, there must be found among the ranks of civilians enough people from whom to recruit candidate LEOs. So, presumably, there must be some number of civilians who are similarly trustworthy but who do not choose to pursue a career as LEOs.
What is it, exactly, that distinguishes the trustworthiness of civilians who are not recruited from those that are recruited? Is it the training that police academies give? Is it the psychological screening police departments use to identify trustworthiness? Is it the experience in carrying a gun in the streets under the supervision of a senior officer? Shouldn’t the Antis or the uncertain be obliged to articulate the minimum standards?
Suppose they come up with a list of standards. Then, shouldn’t all police departments nation-wide be obliged to meet these minimum standards? Or, should it be State-by-State? If State-by-State, then shouldn’t it be sufficient for the Won’t-Issue States to become Shall-Issue on the bases of each such State’s police qualification standards? If it’s good enough for NJ police why is a NJ standard not good enough for a NJ civilian; or, a PA civilian who meets the NJ standard? Isn’t the whole notion of “need” antithetical to the notion of being trustworthy to carry and use a gun?
Lots of readers of this blog won’t want to touch such a line-of-reasoning with a 10-foot-pole; and, I can understand the sentiment. These will be fearful of a retrenchment in Constitutional Carry States. I’m not much worried about that risk. I think the discussion ought to be approached in a discussion in an exploratory manner. If someone argues that the carry laws ought not be relaxed we can ask “Why not”? “Why don’t you trust your neighbor when you trust Officer Friendly on your beat?”
I’m always looking for a way out when I carry. The whole point is to not use it if at all possible. The Story is crap by the way, the guy is obviously unbalanced from the get go.
Timing. Yesterday an aquantence asked me if I would kill someone with my gun. I replied “that is the only use i have for it.” She didn’t understand, so i explained that i will do everything to avoid any situation which my gun was necessary, and if ever effort to avoid, run, take much abuse, humiliation etc failed, then I KNEW IN ADVANCE that the outcome would be an attackers death, because that was the ONLY option left. (Other than my or mine’s) death(s).
Garrison, thanks! You pointed out that most media outlets do this.
They are a biz that gets paid to keep you listening.
Just because you agree with their story doesn’t mean it’s true.
Rachel & Rush are the same.
Disagree? Here.
Look for pic of two smiling fellows, Cheney and Saddam.
Add the Mujaheddin our allies who we trained advised and armed with US tax dollars.
Don’t think for yourself. Then the Constitution should read “We the Sheeple.”
The way I worked it out for myself a long time ago was that “being angry is not a reason to shoot anyone, being scared enough to shoot is something else all together.” One one occasion it probably saved a guy’s life when I confronted him climbing into my bedroom window. He had done yard work for me several times so I vaguely “knew him”. Though I held him at gunpoint I was so mad I couldn’t shoot him. And this was a Big black man climbing into the window of an older white guy half his size, in small town Mississippi. So I guess my method works, at least for me.
It’s typical narrative-based propaganda meant to trigger an emotional response – “Phew, that was a close call! That guy could have killed somebody just because he was mad. Good thing he became enlightened about gun ownership and got rid of the deadly presence in his home.”
Instead, I read a story like this and think – “That man has no discernment, no emotional control, and thinks a gun is an offensive weapon. He should not have any kind of weapon in his home if he can’t control himself. He was threatened with eviction, so he ran and got his gun? And he apparently was going to use it before his wife stopped him. The deadly presence in his home isn’t the gun. It’s him. I still say good for him for getting rid of it. Now let’s get Ned some counseling. But let’s not blame the gun for whispering evil ideas into Ned’s ear.
This was a couple of years ago. When I was sitting down eating at a cafeteria, some 11 or 12 year old girl bumped into me without saying “sorry, excuse me” or any similar acknowledgment. I said to her, “hey, watch it!” and she went and sat down.
Well, her mommie apparently decided little Snowflake could do no wrong and tried to berate me. This little mommie just went *off*. Stuff like, “YOU DON’T YELL AT A LITTLE GIRL!!” and such. Note: had I actually yelled at anybody, the whole cafeteria would’ve heard it. Well, I wasn’t going to apologize for *her* daughter’s mistake and *her* inability to properly raise her daughter to be polite. Soooo….
She pulls the hubby card. Calls out to him, points at me and says, “HE JUST YELLED AT OUR DAUGHTER!!” Hubby’s a pretty big guy, and seems she’s used to him being able to intimidate others based on his size. So, apparently, is he. He gets an angry look and starts walking aggressively toward me. So, I stand up to my full height and he discovers, with shock, that I’m not only as big as he is, but I’m also in considerably better physical condition! Whoops….
All this time, I am very well aware that I am CC’ing. Given his approach and the situation, in my locality, I probably would be on firm legal footing to take him down and beat him senseless. But I don’t want to do that. I much prefer to avoid a fight. Why? Because I am carrying and if we get into it, it may end *VERY* badly for him. That therefore also means very badly for his (rude) wife and 12-year-old daughter. I don’t want any of that.
So, I don’t back down, I stand my ground and stand up for myself as a proper man does, but I don’t make any moves *at* him. Rather, I stare right at him eye-to-eye, keep my voice calm, letting him know, politely, quietly, but firmly, that perhaps his daughter needs to learn some politeness and respect, and that he needs to back his behind down RIGHT NOW. He realizes he’s in a bad situation and has made a fool of himself.
It ends with him turning tail and saying loudly, “Well…don’t do anything ELSE rude!” A weak attempt on his part to get out of the situation and save some face, to be sure. But I’m OK with that. Physical confrontation avoided, which is what I wanted. And yes, that piece I was carrying did hold me back from taking him down. Funny how your own gun can do that.
The antis are wrong, yet again. That’s my example, from my own life.
– T
“So I said, ‘I’m done. I can’t pack no gun no more.’ And it took that kind of thing to get me right.”
And this is the myth that the antis misguidedly insist is the solution. Removing the weapon didn’t do a thing to “get him right”. He’s only an arm length from a short length of rebar or other object from being as dangerous as he ever was.
I find myself working out my strategy for handling all different scenarios. I play out in my mind the passive and aggressive roles in each and look for the best outcome. Does that mean I am looking for trouble? Is there something wrong with me? Or is this common?
I would use the same mental exercises for tennis matches: create scenarios, and then play them out, to determine how I would react, what shot(s) I would take, what my stroke mechanics would be, etc.
If it is a useful exercise for something as unimportant as a tennis match, I would daresay that it is useful for mental preparation for use (or avoidance) of deadly force in self-defense.
Absolutely agree. When I started to carry regularly, I drove slower and fewer and fewer things were big deals. After 15 years of carrying concealed, I can’t remember the last thing that really pissed me off.
First of all, I am happy the see that this fella takes Dirty Harry’s maxim to heart and acted upon it (A man’s gotta know his limitations.”
Second, daily carry keeps me convinced that running away from danger is the prime directive. Since in my state the use of a gun to deter crime is considered a crime in itself, that means once the gun clears the holster, someone’s gotta get shot. If the best measure of success in a gun fight is “don’t be there”, then I only want to “be there” when there is truly no other place to be.
It could also be that being mature enough to responsibly carry simply means you’re overall a more mature person. Look at the things gun grabbers say, the vitriolic bile they spew like raving psychopaths, and you start to realize that it really is people, not weapons, that create violence.
Thank God leftists don’t carry.
Re: Title question
Yes, although I am not a confrontational person by nature.
It makes me CONSCIENTIOUSLY non-confrontational.
And I have been lawfully carrying for 35 years.
Comments are closed.